No politics in the courtroom, please

THE SPECTATOR’S VIEWS

If you walked into an Ontario courtroom wearing a baseball hat, you’d quickly be told to remove it. Even if you perch your sunglasses on your head, you’d be told to take them off in some courtrooms. It’s not about trivial details. It’s about respecting the court and the legal and judicial process. Respecting justice.

In that sense, there is no question that Hamilton Judge Bernd Zabel exhibited an unfortunate double standard when he entered his courtroom last week wearing a “Make America Great Again” baseball hat — the cap that has become an icon for Donald Trump supporters, and a red flag for critics. Zabel is reported to have worn the cap into court, removed it and put it on display near him, and returned after a break still brandishing the Trump symbol.

This doesn’t make him a bad judge. It doesn’t mean he has Trumpian beliefs that would influence his decision-making on the bench. It doesn’t mean he supports Trump’s views on Islam or the walling off of Mexico. Or that he is intolerant of minorities. Zabel appears to be a respected jurist. But he exhibited bad judgment in this case, so it’s little wonder social justice advocates, including Hamilton Coun. Matt Green want him disciplined at minimum, removed from the bench at maximum.

The latter seems extreme unless there is evidence of improper behaviour aside from this. But it’s clear the judge, or his proxy — probably someone at the Ontario Court of Justice or judicial council — needs to speak to the matter and respond to the public concerns. In the case of judicial equity, perception is reality.

It’s also undeniable that by wearing the hat, and displaying his support for Trump, the judge violated the Principles of Judicial Office, developed by the Ontario Judicial Council. They say, among many other things: “Judges should not be influenced by partisan interests, public pressure or fear of criticism. Judges should maintain their objectivity and shall not, by words or conduct, manifest favour, bias or prejudice toward any party or interest.” And: “Judges must not participate in any partisan political activity. Judges must not contribute financially to any political party.”

So it’s clear that any partisan activity is a violation, and Zabel’s actions are clearly partisan. These guidelines are advisory only, meaning they are not binding in a legal sense. But surely it means something when they are not followed, and there should be some action or at least explanation.

The courtroom is supposed to be a sacred place where justice happens. Politics don’t have a place there. No Maple Leaf hats. No Blue Jay sweaters for court staff or judges. And certainly no symbols of a leader who has demonstrated intolerance and bigotry. There are enough people already who don’t trust or respect the legal system. This isn’t helpful.